Flickr

07 February 2011

From Cindy Steinle at PetHobbyist.com (where I also contribute), news that a Dallas reporter asked Michael Vick about his dogs at a ceremony granting Vick a "key to the city."

A reporter who said he had adopted one of Michael Vick's pit bulls confronted Vick about his dogs at a media event in Dallas last week.

Dallas Councilmember and Mayor Pro Tem Dwaine Caraway awarded Vick the "key to the city" at a ceremony on Feb. 5. A man, who identified himself as Richard Hunter of 1190 AM radio, said he had adopted one of Vick's former fighting dogs and wanted to ask him a couple of questions about the dogs.

Richard Hunter is the name of the man who owns Mel, one of Vick's former dogs.

Vick refused to answer, just looked at Hunter and walked away while one of his security team says, "We don't care about the dog."

05 February 2011

Good morning! Gina's out of town, and you all know what that means by now, right?

Rawley Deerhound told me this morning when he woke up that he was very upset that he was too young to play in last year's Puppy Bowl, and too old for this year's. I told him I really thought that basketball was probably more his game, but he was not consoled.

I didn't have the heart to mention that the Puppy Bowl is only for shelter dogs!

I'll confess additionally that I've never in my life seen a football game and only know who's in this year's Super Bowl because the Wisconsin Humane Society keeps making these agonizingly cute videos with their "Packer Pups." Like this one (couldn't get embed to work!).

Who can resist that? And all those puppies are available for adoption. Genius campaign, and thanks to the Internetz, pretty much free, too.

So, how do you all feel about the Puppy Bowl now that it's gone all sponsored and fancy?

I saw the first one, and it was a very different event then! This is what I posted at the time (2005):

Is anyone else watching the Puppy Bowl on Animal Planet?

This is the best thing I've ever seen on TV, ever.

I can just see them, though, trying to pitch it:

Producer: OK, so, what it is, is a big box painted to look like a football field, full of different kinds of puppies playing.

Animal Planet Executive: OK, what do they do?

Producer: Well, they play. And nap. And poop.

Executive: OK, but what else do they do? Is there a voiceover?

Producer: No, just the camera on the puppies playing. And sometimes a guy comes in and pooper scoops.

Executive: No, really.

Producer: Really. It'll be great.

Executive: Seriously. What's the show about?

Producer: Puppies. Playing. For hours. You know, like the Christmas Eve shows that are just a fireplace burning while Christmas music is playing? It's like that, only it's puppies.

Executive: Puppies.

Producer: Yes. And we have instant replay, too.

Good times.

Other than watching (or not) the Puppy Bowl, what are you all doing this weekend? Watching the Super Bowl, or boycotting it because the NFL let Michael Vick play again? Pretending it doesn't exist and taking advantage of all the extra parking available at the mall?

I had to bring Kyrie to the emergency vet the other evening, after she gashed her leg and needed a couple of stitches. Since I'm dying of galloping consumption or some kind of pathogenic plague-like lung rot (never let it be said I'm not a drama queen), this trip to the vet ranks right up there with my five least favorite outings ever.

But skipping over that part, the vet tech who helped us was awesome and amazing in a way I've never, ever seen before. Check out her totally cool tattoos:

03 February 2011

The Canadian press is reporting that the man who killed around 100 sled dogs in what's being called a "slaughter" and a "massacre" twice reached out to the British Columbia SPCA for help with the dogs, and was turned down both times.

The Vancouver Sun has learned the 38-year-old employee of Outdoor Adventures who killed 100 sled dogs in Whistler approached the BC SPCA on two separate occasions asking for its help in finding adoptive homes for some of the company’s dogs.

Both times he was rebuffed.

Officials at the animal protection agency said they didn’t realize the dogs would be brutally slaughtered. But they said they told the man the dogs would not make good pets and were not adoptable.

How did the folks at the British Columbia SPCA make this determination? Senior animal protection officer Eileen Drever had this to say, quoted in Canada's National Post:

“(The employee) didn’t advise me he was going to kill any dogs. He was looking to find homes. I spoke to an animal behaviourist who is also a vet and she spoke with an expert in the (United) States who said they weren’t adoptable,” said Ms. Drever.

And it gets even worse. The Sun reports that after the killings, Fawcett contacted the SPCA again, writing:

“I understood from Joey (the owner of the sled dog tour company) that there were to be some dogs going to you for adoption? Is that indeed happening? Or should I just show up with a truck full so they can get off the chain and get some attention, exercise, stop fighting, etc....I am happy to bring some down to stop cruelty they are going through here.

“This is me as a bystander (I am off due to injury to both arms). I am the only one who has made any effort to move dogs. We still have almost 60 dogs too many, and a new litter of pups to be given away. Can you please give me a call so I know something can be done. It’s breaking my heart.”

Five days later, Drever replied to him, saying, "I just informed Joey that after consulting with an animal behaviourist/veterinarian we have reached the decision these dogs are not adoptable. I will however conduct an inspection of the facility."

The Sun states she did not investigate the facility at that time.

The SPCA's response? Again, from the same Sun article:

BC SPCA head of animal cruelty Marcie Moriarty said the SPCA would have acted had it known the dogs were going to be slaughtered.

But she added it’s not the SPCA’s responsibility “to take on their issues ... to suddenly make a phone call and say, ‘I have 100 dogs that need placing;’ that’s not an answer to their business operation’s issues,” said Moriarty.

“If we had any indication they would have been executed we absolutely would have done something.” But she added it’s likely they would have still been euthanized.

“What people have to realize because of the way they’re raised they’re not highly adoptable animals. Maybe a few could have been adopted but these dogs are on tethers 90 per cent of their lives. Is it fair [Outdoor Adventures] profits — get thousands of dollars from tourists and not have a retirement plan? Is it fair they would dump them on the SPCA and then we’d have the pain of that euthanization?”

It was crap in Wilkes County, N.C., when 145 dogs "rescued" from a fighting ring were killed by animal control authorities without evaluation -- even nursing puppies. It was crap when it was said about the Vick dogs. And it's crap here.

Moriarty did refute one element of the Sun's account, saying that Fawcett didn't reach out to them until after the killings, about other dogs. But whether he contacted them before or after the initial slaughter doesn't change the story all that much. They were asked to help these dogs, either the 100 who were killed, or the others. They didn't.

How's that for "prevention of cruelty to animals"?

Photo: A dog from the sled dog company that owned the dogs who were killed and employed Fawcett. Photo by Claudia Kwan/Vancouver Sun.

02 February 2011

On Monday, Canadian radio station CKNW discovered and reported on details of the gruesome killing of around 100 sled dogs by the manager of Outdoor Adventures Whistler in British Columbia.

The descriptions are graphic and upsetting, and I've wrestled with how much to share here. I've chosen to give you links instead of quoting the most disturbing material, because it's taken me more than 6 hours to write this post -- I keep having to stop and get a grip on myself. Please click with caution.

Outdoor Adventures Whistler claimed through spokesperson Graham Aldcroft that they had no idea their employee, identified as Robert T. Fawcett, was going to gun the dogs down in such a brutal fashion. They thought they'd be "euthanized" in a humane manner if no homes could be found for them.

Fawcett did attempt to get a veterinarian to kill the dogs by injection, but the vet he asked refused to kill a hundred perfectly healthy dogs. Fawcett also stated some attempt was made to find new homes for the dogs, but without success.

All this came to light because Fawcett filed a workers compensation claim with local authorities for post-traumatic stress symptoms related to the killings. From the Montreal Gazette:

In a Dec. 27, 2010, posting on a website forum for trauma sufferers, a Whistler resident named Bob Fawcett, an award-winning dogsledder, wrote: “I’ve had a pretty horrible ordeal and actually figure I may be able to be a good sounding board for others ... and it has pretty much destroyed my soul.”

I have no problem with working dogs in general nor sled dogs in particular. I think dogs who are doing the work for which they're bred are among the happiest dogs in the world, certainly happier than far too many bored, overweight, under-challenged couch pups.

But there is no breed of dog that was bred to be gunned down, a hundred at a time, by a single unqualified worker, while 200 other chained dogs watched and listened. That is an obscenity.

When I was at the North American Veterinary Conference last month, I attended a number of presentations that made reference to "The Five Freedoms." (Our own Ericka Basile wrote about one of them here.)

The Five Freedoms grew out of a 1965 UK government investigation into inhumane farm practices, which resulted in the 1967 formation of the Farm Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (now the Farm Animal Welfare Council). After going through a number of incarnations, the "five freedoms" became these:

Freedom from thirst and hunger - by ready access to fresh water and a diet to maintain full health and vigour.

Freedom from discomfort - by providing an appropriate environment including shelter and a comfortable resting area.

Freedom from pain, injury, and disease - by prevention or rapid diagnosis and treatment.

Freedom to express normal behavior - by providing sufficient space, proper facilities and company of the animal's own kind.

Freedom from fear and distress - by ensuring conditions and treatment which avoid mental suffering.

Today, those freedoms are being applied to all populations of animals held, kept, sheltered, and worked by humans, from animal shelters to ranches to family farms. They are not honored everywhere nor even in most places where people keep animals. But they are a set of standards being more widely adopted every day, and against which there is no legitimate opposition.

One of the ways in which the last freedom is always interpreted is that animals should never be killed, slaughtered, euthanized -- use whatever term you like -- in the sight or hearing of other animals. And the animals who are dying need to die in a way that's swift and as free of stress as possible.

We can argue all day long about the nuances and terms of these standards. I've had those debates already, and I'm sure I'll have a hundred more. But every organization or business, from animal shelter to farm, that doesn't live up to those standards is going to find itself increasingly expected to do so, or face consequences ranging from legal penalties to greater regulation to criminal charges.

If the sled dog tour industry wants to hold its head up for one more day, if it wants to continue to exist even beyond this winter, it needs to not just denounce this brutal action, but make sure the "culling" of its retired dogs is handled by adoption, sanctuary, and creative re-homing, not by the bullet nor even by the needle.

“Any dog sledder who culls dogs at the end of a season should be culled himself, as far as we’re concerned,” said Paul McCormick, head dog sledding guide for Wilderness Adventures, a Toronto-based company that runs dog-sledding trips through Canada’s Algonquin Park.

“You don’t go out and cull dogs,” he said. “We’re part of the largest dog sled operation in the world with 40 dogs and we never cull dogs. We retire them, they’re adopted ... there are a lot of alternatives.”

The veterinarian who refused to kill those dogs was right, even if their ultimate fates may haunt him. All our activities on this planet need to be sustainable, and if we bring sled dogs, or any other animals, into this world, they're our responsibility.

Our business plans, our economic models, can't be based on an exit strategy drenched in animal blood, that becomes the stuff of human nightmares.